Soft-drink Deal Beckons Crete-monee

Thirsting For Cash, District 201-u Shops For An Ad Contract

March 24, 1998|By Stephanie Banchero, Tribune Staff Writer.

For three years, school officials at Crete-Monee District 201-U have labored to close a multimillion-dollar budget deficit. They've eliminated staff positions, curtailed art and music programs, increased class sizes and floated a proposal to close schools.

But the result has been much like using a cup to bail water from the Titanic.

Now, Crete-Monee officials have seized on a new, and controversial, idea for healing their financial woes. School board members may sign a contract with Coca-Cola, Pepsi or Dr. Pepper/Seven-Up that would eliminate the competition's products from school hallways, cafeteria corridors and stadium concession stands.

If school officials sign the estimated $100,000 deal, Crete-Monee would become the first in Illinois to join the growing ranks of school districts elsewhere offering exclusive advertising access to their children in exchange for big bucks from soft-drink companies.

Advertising in schools is not a recent phenomenon, but exclusive contracts are.

In the last year, the soft-drink giants have promised millions of dollars to schools across the country in return for long-term, exclusive rights to market to students. In Colorado Springs, for example, district officials signed an $8 million deal with Coke; in Grapevine, Texas, educators authorized a $3.4 million deal with Dr. Pepper/Seven-Up.

If the Crete-Monee deal turns out to be like others, it could include a provision to allow a soft-drink company the right to advertise in hallways, gyms or even on school rooftops.

And it's this provision that makes some educators jittery.

"Advertising carries a tremendous weight with young people, and any advertising in classrooms, hallways or billboards only sends convoluted messages to kids," said George King, spokesman for the Illinois Education Association. "We are in favor of corporations helping further education, but not in ways that blatantly smack of hard-core advertising."

Commercialism invaded the corridors of learning in the late 1980s with the introduction of Channel One Network, a service that provides high-priced television equipment to schools in exchange for airing specially produced news and advertising programs. It has progressed into schools offering ad space to major corporations in return for cash or goodies the district otherwise could not afford.

Officials in the Chicago Public Schools and in Bloom Township District 206 in Chicago Heights, for example, have contacted Nike and Converse about renovating gyms or field houses in exchange for a spot to hang their logos.

School officials defend the agreements, saying they are necessary to close budget gaps at a time when voters are soundly rejecting tax-increase incentives.

"Kids are already immersed in the world of advertising," said Crete-Monee Supt. Steve Humphrey. "We are tapping into a revenue source that will help students get better programs in the long run. We are entering the marketplace as a consumer."

For the soft-drink companies, the contracts offer access to a prime audience: young customers who are just now shaping their buying habits.

"It's a natural fit," said Larry Zabbonski, spokesman for Pepsi-Cola Co. "It works on any number of levels. The school districts are on the lookout for new revenue sources. At the same time, we are looking for new ways to connect with young people."

Such talk makes critics cringe. They see the union between soft-drink companies and schools as far more insidious and argue that halls of learning should be free from crass commercialism.

"If these school officials were serious about education, they'd go after local foundations for money, they wouldn't lie down with marketers," said Marianne Manilov, head of the Oakland-based Center of Commercial Free Public Education.

Bob Cook, director of business affairs for Crete-Monee, said parents, teachers and administrators have spent the better part of 40 years hunting for funding sources.

"We've looked under every rock," he said. "We've held bake sales, applied for grants, borrowed money and discussed bond referendums. Now, we are looking at this new source."

Last month, Crete-Monee officials contracted with DD Marketing, a Pueblo, Colo.-based marketing firm, to negotiate the soft-drink agreement. Humphrey said that, under the agreement, the district would receive an estimated $100,000 in advance, plus a percentage of sales of soft drinks in the high school, middle and five elementary schools.

DD Marketing will meet with a coalition of school administrators, parents and teachers within a month to discuss the exact terms of the contract proposal.

DD Marketing's Stu Nickell said such deals can include adding vending machines in elementary schools, allowing advertising in school hallways or naming a stadium after the soft-drink firm.

Despite their sudden popularity, school soft-drink contracts already are facing a backlash.

In Seattle, opposition forced the school board to suspend its search for the highest soft-drink bidder. In Wisconsin, lawmakers are considering a bill to ban school districts from signing such contracts.

"It's a slippery slope," said state Rep. Marlin Schneider, sponsor of the Wisconsin bill. "What's next, some large company coughing up money and then telling the school's social studies department, `We don't want you saying anything bad about our labor or investment practices?' "

"It will end up inhibiting academic freedom, and I think any educator who stops to think about it will realize this is not where we want to end up."